> > By "explicit when invoking dladm" do you mean that I'd have to also > > include a zone name? That's exactly the part that concerns me, since it > > means higher-level consumers of dladm or libdladm have to start tracking > > zone names along with link names -- and update this state on a zone > > rename. Possible, but neither simple nor beautiful. > > That's what I had in mind, and I agree that we need to be careful here. > An alternative would be to restrict the management of these zone-local > link names from within zone configuration tools.
I think Erik's suggestion of having a special naming convention for zone-local links in the global zone is worth some thought. It mirrors the way we handle the file namespace -- e.g., each zone has its own /, and each is visible in the global zone, but prefixed with the path to the mountpoint for that zone's root. -- meem
